The most important stories for you to know today
Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision along partisan lines, ruled that Louisiana's 2024 election map, which created a second majority-Black congressional district, was"an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.
"Although the court kept Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act intact, Wednesday's decision all but guts the landmark law that came out of the Civil Rights Movement and protected the collective voting power of racial minorities when political maps are redrawn. The U.S.
" Although the court kept Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act intact, Wednesday's decision all but guts the landmark law that came out of the Civil Rights Movement and protected the collective voting power of racial minorities when political maps are redrawn. It isn't yet clear how the decision will affect November's midterms. Primaries are well underway in most states.
Once considered the jewel in the crown of the civil rights movement, the Voting Rights Act has been largely dismembered since 2013 by the increasingly conservative Supreme Court. The major exception was a decision just two years ago that upheld the section of the law aimed at ensuring that minority voters are not shut out of the process of drawing new congressional district lines.
At issue in the case was the redistricting map drawn by the Louisiana legislature after the decennial Census. Following years of litigation, the state, with a 30% Black population, first fought and then finally agreed to draw a second majority-Black district. Two of the state's six House members are African American.
Normally, that would have been the end of the case, but a self-described group of"non-African-American voters" intervened after the new maps were drawn up to object to the legislature's redistricting.
"Correctly understood, Section 2 does not impose liability at odds with the Constitution, and it should not have imposed liability on Louisiana for its 2022 map," Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion. "Compliance with Section 2 thus could not justify the State's use of race-based redistricting here. " In her dissent, Justice Elena Kagan wrote that she dissented"because the Court betrays its duty to faithfully implement the great statute Congress wrote.
I dissent because the Court's decision will set back the foundational right Congress granted of racial equality in electoral opportunity.
"Six leading Democratic candidates for governor were seeking a breakout moment Tuesday night in a chaotic, combative and often hard-to-follow CBS debate at Pomona College, prompting former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter to declare at one point that “this is worse than my teenagers at dinner. ”The Democrats largely failed to differentiate themselves as they tackled questions on the cost of living, health care, education, housing and energy, struggling to promote new policies to address the crushing cost of living.
They were careful not to attack the liberal policies of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has declined to endorse any of them. All eight said they support forcing homeless residents who refuse repeated shelter offers into mandated mental health treatment facilities. Mahan and Thurmond agreed with Republicans Bianco and Steve Hilton that the state gas tax should be suspended; Becerra, Porter, Steyer and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa disagreed.
On energy, Porter agreed with Mahan and Villaraigosa that the state should aim to keep oil refineries open amid skyrocketing gas prices while working toward greater electrification, while Steyer called for more taxes, on oil industry profits. Hilton, who has promised to eliminate many climate goals to lower the price of gas, did not say what he would do to support clean energySix leading Democratic candidates for governor were seeking a breakout moment Tuesday night in a race that has been dominated by its lack of certainty, with two Republican candidates frequently in the lead.
None of them appeared to find one in a chaotic, combative and often hard-to-follow CBS debate at Pomona College, prompting former Orange County Rep. Katie Porter to declare at one point that “this is worse than my teenagers at dinner.
” With less than a week before ballots are mailed to voters, though, the targets were clear: Billionaire Tom Steyer, who has led fellow Democrats in polling and has alreadyof his own money on the race; and Xavier Becerra, the former U.S. Health and Human Services secretary who has had a sudden surge in momentum since former Rep. Eric Swalwell dropped out amid allegations of sexual assault.
Porter, once a rising national progressive star, got in a dig at Steyer, who has consolidated support among many of the party’s most left-wing activists. She criticized the fortune he made in part by investing in fossil fuels when he tried to tout his climate-friendly credentials and policy of “making polluters pay. ” Steyer has said that he subsequently divested from those investments and devoted himself to addressing climate change.
Becerra, meanwhile, was criticized by moderate Democratic San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan for his mixed record as former President Joe Biden’s health secretary and for bristling when pressed for policy specifics. At one point, Becerra argued with one of the five debate moderators over the legality of his proposal to call a state of emergency to freeze home insurance rates.
Becerra entered the debate fresh off a recent boost in polling and fundraising, buoyed by an army of online influencers whose posts adviser Michael Bustamante said are “all organic. ” The candidate was eager to spar with his competitors, but his newfound spotlight has also come with scrutiny about his record on immigration and health.
Progressives and Steyer’s campaign have also highlighted Becerra’s support from companies like Chevron and his handling of an influx of unaccompanied migrant children as Biden’s health secretary. Afound that those children — whom Becerra had pressured officials to process and place as if they were running an “assembly line” — ended up in dangerous child labor jobs. Becerra later dismissed the criticism as a “MAGA talking point” and said the Department of Homeland Security was responsible for the child labor.
Republican Chad Bianco, the ornery Riverside County sheriff with a penchant for the conspiratorial, was also on the offensive Tuesday night. He leapt to attack Democratic policies wholesale as “lies” whenever he could. He drew groans from the audience when he interrupted Becerra to state, falsely, that COVID-19 vaccines distributed under Biden had “poisoned” millions of Americans.
But the Democrats largely failed to differentiate themselves as they tackled questions on the cost of living, health care, education, housing and energy, struggling to promote new policies to address the crushing cost of living. They were careful not to attack the liberal policies of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has declined to endorse any of them.
Even getting a moment in the spotlight was hard in a debate format that seemed to jump from subject to subject and in which candidates frequently interrupted one another.
“They’re all wrong,” Mahan said, as he tried to walk the line between the Republicans supporting a Trump tax policy thatBut Mahan didn’t offer much of an alternative, saying the answer was “incentivizing actual health. ” All eight said they support forcing homeless residents who refuse repeated shelter offers into mandated mental health treatment facilities.
Mahan and Thurmond agreed with Republicans Bianco and Steve Hilton that the state gas tax should be suspended; Becerra, Porter, Steyer and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa disagreed. On energy, Porter agreed with Mahan and Villaraigosa that the state should aim to keep oil refineries open amid skyrocketing gas prices while working toward greater electrification, while Steyer called for more taxes, on oil industry profits.
Hilton, who has promised to eliminate many climate goals to lower the price of gas, did not say what he would do to support clean energy. He has dominated most polling in the governor’s race.
“I think I’m more confused on who to vote for now than ever,” said Pomona College politics student Kloi Ogans after the debate. “So I have a lot more researching to do. ” As part of the debate, Ogans was invited to ask the candidates about rebuilding housing in California. She said after the debate that young voters are worried about affordability and concerned about Trump’s immigration enforcement sweeps.
She particularly wanted to hear from Becerra and Porter, but the sparring among candidates made her disinterested. Proposition 36 is getting mixed reviews nearly 18 months after it was passed. Supporters say it has been effective in punishing repeat offenders, particularly for drug crimes and petty theft. Critics say it targets people who commit"crimes of poverty" and it has failed to provide adequate treatment for those who need it.
Prop. 36, which passed in November 2024, promised California voters a new era of “mass treatment” for people struggling with addiction and a crackdown on repeat petty thieves amid a spike in retail theft. The debate around the measure, called “The Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act,” was fueled in part by a series of videotaped smash-and-grab robberies splashed across local TV news and images of unhoused residents shooting up drugs in the streets.
In 2025, California prosecutors filed more than 19,000 Prop. 36 felony drug cases and more than 15,500 felony theft cases, according to a study by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice released in March. In Los Angeles County alone, there are about 1,150 individuals in jail because of Prop. 36 — about a 9% increase in the jail population, according to county Public Defender Ricardo Garcia.
Proposition 36, which passed in November 2024, promised California voters a new era of “mass treatment” for people struggling with addiction and a crackdown on repeat petty thieves amid a spike in retail theft. The debate around the measure, called “The Homelessness, Drug Addiction and Theft Reduction Act,” was fueled in part by a series of videotaped smash-and-grab robberies splashed across local TV news and images of unhoused residents shooting up drugs in the streets.
Voters signaled they wanted a crackdown and they approved Prop. 36 with nearly 70% casting ballots in favor of it. Supporters say it's been effective in holding repeat offenders accountable. Critics say it's been a return to mass incarceration without the promised treatment for people with substance abuse.
Here’s how the measure works: If you have been convicted of two misdemeanor thefts of $950 or less, prosecutors have the option of charging your third petty theft as a felony, which carries up to a three-year prison term. This is part of a weeklong series from our elections newsletter, Make It Make Sense, in which we check in on the people and measures that were elected in 2024.
When it comes to drug offenses under Prop 36, if you have been convicted of two possessions of a small amount of hard drugs , prosecutors have the option of charging your third possession as a felony. But you don’t have to go to prison if you agree to go into drug treatment.
In 2025, California prosecutors filed more than 19,000 Prop. 36 felony drug cases and more than 15,500 felony theft cases, according to a study by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice released in March. Most people were released on bail pending the outcome of their case. Nearly 900 Californians have been sent to state prison under Prop. 36, since it went into effect in December 2024.
County jail populations have grown by nearly 3,000 since the measure passed, driven by a surge in felony bookings of people who have not yet been sentenced. In Los Angeles County alone, there are about 1,150 individuals in jail because of Prop. 36 — about a 9% increase in the jail population, according to county Public Defender Ricardo Garcia. The surge in defendants is adding caseloads to his already overworked attorneys, he said.
“This is really compounding the workload crisis,” said Kate Chatfield, executive director of the California Public Defenders Association. The data represents a reversal of yearslong declines in incarceration, and they are occurring amid all-time lows in California’s crime rate. Black people are dramatically overrepresented in Prop. 36 charges, according to the study. In Contra Costa County, for example, Black residents account for more than half of all Proposition 36 theft charges, despite making up less than one-tenth of the population.
“It’s been a valuable tool to go after chronic and repeat thieves,” Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman said. Hochman said his office brought more than 3,300 Prop. 36 felony cases against people charged with their third petty theft in 2025. He said his office brought over 1,900 felony cases against people charged with their third possession of hard drugs. He said he couldn’t immediately provide numbers on how many of the drug defendants opted for rehabilitation over prison.
Statewide, fewer than 1 in 5 people arrested on Prop. 36 drug charges have been ordered to treatment, and fewer than 1 in 100 have completed a program, according to the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice study. One reason for the low treatment numbers is a scarcity of treatment beds throughout the state.
“There just isn’t enough treatment to meet the need,” said the center’s Maureen Washburn. “People aren’t getting connected to treatment. They aren’t succeeding in treatment programs once they’re in them. ”“We do not have anywhere close to enough drug treatment and mental illness beds in a county of 10 million people,” he said.
“Sacramento has not funded at any meaningful level,” he said. In a March letter to the chair of the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Committee, the co-author of Prop. 36 — Senator Tom Umberg — said at least $400 million dollars in new funding is needed for treatment facilities.
“I think spending taxpayer dollars on drug treatment — both in the short term and in the long term — is a smart way to address public safety issues,” Umberg told LAist. But Chatfield said people facing Prop. 36 charges shouldn't be locked up in the first place. Drug offenses should be handled as a public health issue, she argued.
In addition to a paucity of treatment beds, the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice study found charging rates vary dramatically by county. Orange County alone accounted for nearly 20% of Prop. 36 drug charges and 40% of theft convictions in 2025 despite representing just 8% of the state’s population.
“This inconsistency across counties exacerbates California’s longstanding problem of providing differing ”justice by geography,” the report stated. Empirical evidence of the effect of Prop. 36 on the crime rate is lacking. But Umberg said he believes it has reduced retail theft.
“I have been told by a huge number of folks in law enforcement and also in the business community — particularly in the retail community — that it has had an effect on retail theft,” Umberg said. “We’re waiting on statistics that we’ll probably get sometime this year to see if the deterrent aspect is also working — that we actually have fewer people going ahead and committing these crimes,” Hochman said.
But crime was on the way down before Proposition 36 passed. Violent crime fell 6% and property crime dropped 8.4% in California in 2024 — the year Prop. 36 passed. Chatfield of the California Public Defenders Association maintains voters were “sold a bill of goods” on the measure.
“They were told this was about homelessness. They were told this was about treatment. And it absolutely was not," she said.
"It was about increasing incarceration. ”If you're enjoying this article, you'll love our daily newsletter, The LA Report. Each weekday, catch up on the 5 most pressing stories to start your morning in 3 minutes or less. The study found that higher device use to calm or distract a child was linked to more behavior problems and higher maternal stress.
Using a device to calm a small child? A new study out of UC Irvine finds that’s linked to more behavioral problems. , found higher device use was linked to more behavior issues among toddlers, like biting or hitting or kicking — as well as higher parental stress. The study followed more than 200 families in Orange County and Washington, D.C.
, over time, from when a child was 9 months old to 2.5 years old. : Stephanie Reich, a professor of education, said devices can be replacing an important opportunity to learn how to self-regulate.
“If they don’t have that skill, they then might act out more, have more behavior problems, which makes parenting more stressful — which probably makes it more likely they get devices again,” she said. Using a tablet or TV to calm a fussy child might work in the short-term, but a new study out of UC Irvine finds it could backfire later.
, found that higher device use was linked to more behavior issues among toddlers, like biting or hitting or kicking — as well as more parental stress. The study followed more than 200 families in Orange County and Washington, D.C. , over time, from when a child was 9 months old to 2-and-a-half years old.
“Emotion regulation skills — like their own ability to calm and distract themselves — might be being displaced by devices instead,” said Stephanie Reich, professor of education at UC Irvine. “And if don't have that skill, they might act out more, have more behavior problems. ” More behavioral problems in turn can make parenting more stressful, which means it’ll make it more likely that kids get devices again, creating a cycle parents can get stuck in, Reich said.
The study also found that mothers experienced more stress later when using devices to distract their children, but that wasn’t the experience for fathers. While higher device use was linked to more behavior problems, fathers did not feel the level of stress as much as mothers. When mothers were stressed, they were more likely to use devices, Reich said.
She couldn’t definitively explain why there was a difference between parents, but said that in general, parenting work falls more to mothers.
“They just might be more overwhelmed, or taking on more than fathers when it comes to day-to-day parenting,” she said. The study notes the type of parent-child interactions that might be replaced by devices, including picking them up, holding and rocking them, and talking to them calmly and reminding them to breathe.
“All of these types of interactions, from physical touch to language use to breathing tips for calming, offer the developing child opportunities to cultivate their self-regulatory skills,” the authors wrote. A federal judge is weighing whether to grant a temporary court order to give immediate relief to immigrants detained at the Adelanto ICE Processing Center. Immigrants rights groups and a private firm filed a lawsuit against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security in January.
They allege that the approximately 2,000 people currently held at the Adelanto complex are subject to inhumane treatment. On top of squalid conditions, the lawsuit alleges that detainees at Adelanto are fed cold, unsanitary food and expected to drink dirty water. They also say detainees must often wait several months to see a doctor and thatis used to retaliate against those who speak out against these conditions and to isolate detainees who are experiencing mental health crises.
Since last September, at least four people have died while detained in this facility. The federal government has asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit. Pushkal Mishra, representing ICE and DHS, said “between the government and the alleged injury are the independent, discretionary, uncertain and speculative day-to-day activities of a third party. ” He argued that The GEO Group, a private prison operator that runs the Adelanto facility, is the"proper defendant" in the case.said she’ll need more time to decide.
In addition to the preliminary injunction, she is also navigating the federal government’s motion to dismiss the case and a motion by the plaintiffs to make this a class action lawsuit, meaning the court’s outcome would apply to all Adelanto detainees. A federal judge said she’ll need more time to decide whether to grant a temporary court order to give immigrants detained at Adelanto ICE Processing Center immediate relief.against Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the Department of Homeland Security in January.
They allege that the approximately 2,000 people currently held at the Adelanto complex are subject to inhumane treatment. On top of squalid conditions, plaintiffs say detainees are fed cold, unsanitary food and expected to drink dirty water. They also allege detainees must often wait several months to see a doctor, if they ever do.
“The conditions in which these non-citizens are being held in the Adelanto detention facility, as alleged in the petition, are certainly concerning,” said Judge Sunshine Sykes at a hearing Tuesday for the Central District of California. “I think that each of us would never want to be in that position.
” Still, Sykes said she was tentatively inclined to “deny the motion without prejudice or to allow plaintiffs to withdraw the motion and refile it,” which would give the immigrants rights groups a chance to address her concerns. She then gave the attorneys the opportunity to respond and, potentially, convince her otherwise. Adelanto is about 90 miles away from downtown Los Angeles. According to the lawsuit, the detention center does not accommodate detainees with special needs.
Detainees with mobility issues, for instance, are assigned top bunks. And in a sworn declaration, one detainee described being put in handcuffs and ankle chains when she is taken to court appointments, even though she uses a cane. Plaintiffs also say solitary confinement is used to retaliate against detainees who speak out against these conditions and to isolate those who are experiencing mental health crises.
Anfound that as of January, Adelanto is among the top 10 facilities that put immigrant detainees in solitary confinement across the country. The detention center is run by The GEO Group Inc., one of the largest private prison operators in the United States. The federal government has declined LAist's request for interviews and comments, and The GEO Group has not responded to those requests.
In the hearing, Judge Sykes raised concerns that The GEO Group and the Adelanto warden are not named in the lawsuit. She also questioned how the court could enforce an order for immediate relief and wondered if there might be a more “efficient” way for the plaintiffs to proceed. The federal government has asked the judge to dismiss the lawsuit altogether.
Pushkal Mishra, representing ICE and DHS, said “between the government and the alleged injury are the independent, discretionary, uncertain and speculative day-to-day activities of a third party. ” The GEO Group and its employees, he argued, “are the proper defendants in the case, not government. ” The advocates' lawsuit underscores that companies like The GEO Group are subject to inspection by the federal government. Recently, ICE gave the Adelanto ICE Processing Center a “good” rating.
Since September 2025, at least four people have died in detention at Adelanto, the most recent March 25. At the hearing, Vanessa Young Viniegra, a fellow at Public Counsel, refuted the federal government’s argument that ICE and DHS should not be named defendants in the case.
“The Supreme Court has been clear that the government has a constitutional duty to care for the people in its custody and the people that it chooses to detain,” she said, “regardless of whether it employs a private company. ” Judge Sykes interjected: “I don't think I'm saying that the government is not a proper defendant. I'm saying that The GEO Group the warden of Adelanto may need to be joined or brought in as defendants as well.
” Young Viniegra noted that the motion for the emergency court order provides the government “some leeway” in terms of how it obligates Adelanto to provide adequate care for detainees.
“We're not asking the court to order, you know, a specific number of staff,” she said. “It's up to the government to comply with its constitutional obligations and exactly how it does that and its relationship with GEO is for it to decide. ”said she’ll need more time to make a decision.
In addition to the preliminary injunction, she is also navigating the federal government’s motion to dismiss the case and a motion by the plaintiffs to make this a class action lawsuit, meaning the court’s outcome would apply to all Adelanto detainees. Adelanto ICE facility's use of solitary confinement is among 10 highest in US, data shows
United States Latest News, United States Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme x Dr. Martens Postal Supreme and Supreme x Jordan CollectionSupreme releases new collections with Dr. Martens and Jordan Brand, featuring distinct styles, internal components, and co-branded designs. The collections will be available on supreme.com and in global stores.
Read more »
Appeals court rejects Trump’s no-bond immigration detentions, setting stage for Supreme Court reviewA federal appeals court says the Trump administration cannot jail immigrants without bond, citing “serious constitutional questions.”.
Read more »
Appeals court rejects Trump’s no-bond immigration detentions, setting stage for Supreme Court reviewA federal appeals court says the Trump administration cannot jail immigrants without bond, citing “serious constitutional questions.”.
Read more »
Appeals court rejects Trump’s no-bond immigration detentions, setting stage for Supreme Court reviewA federal appeals court says the Trump administration cannot jail immigrants without bond, citing “serious constitutional questions.”.
Read more »
Appeals court rejects Trump’s no-bond immigration detentions, setting stage for Supreme Court reviewThe court found the government’s interpretation of immigration law defies its purpose.
Read more »
Houston rabbi among families planning Supreme Court appeal after federal court upholds Ten Commandments lawA Houston rabbi is among 15 Texas families planning to take their lawsuit to the U.S. Supreme Court after a federal appeals court upheld the state’s Ten Commandments law.
Read more »